You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Cody Sherr <cs...@covalent.net> on 2001/08/10 01:32:06 UTC
configuration directives for spmt_os2
This mpm is missing these configuration directives:
ScoreBoardFile
LockFile
AcceptMutex
though it uses related variables Is there a reason for this?
Thanks,
--
Cody Sherr
Engineer
Covalent Technologies
phone: (415)536-5292
email: csherr@covalent.net
Re: configuration directives for spmt_os2
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 03:25:21PM +1000, Brian Havard wrote:
> that convention (which I prefered). Do we have an MPM naming convension or
> is it just whatever the author feels like?
Whatever you feel like. I wish we had a naming convention though.
mpmt_os2, mpmt_pthread, mpmt_winnt, spmt_pthread, etc. would be what
I'd suggest. -- justin
Re: configuration directives for spmt_os2
Posted by Brian Havard <br...@kheldar.apana.org.au>.
On Thu, 9 Aug 2001 17:20:59 -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>Sorry, didn't mean to send this to the list. When I said it was messed up,
>I meant the OS/2 MPM wasn't like the rest of them. My general feeling
>is that if the OS/2 or Windows MPMs don't make sense, leave them alone,
>and let the developers who understand them do any work on them
>later.
Fair enough. It is actually quite a mess due to the fact that it was a
quick hack port of prefork with threads substituted for processes. I'm
currently working on an mpmt MPM for OS/2 that will replace it, written
from scratch. It currently runs & serves requests but still needs some work
to be complete.
I'd like to call it mpmt_os2 but MPM naming seems to have moved away from
that convention (which I prefered). Do we have an MPM naming convension or
is it just whatever the author feels like?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| Brian Havard | "He is not the messiah! |
| brianh@kheldar.apana.org.au | He's a very naughty boy!" - Life of Brian |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: configuration directives for spmt_os2
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
Sorry, didn't mean to send this to the list. When I said it was messed up,
I meant the OS/2 MPM wasn't like the rest of them. My general feeling
is that if the OS/2 or Windows MPMs don't make sense, leave them alone,
and let the developers who understand them do any work on them
later.
Ryan
On Thursday 09 August 2001 17:07, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> No idea. That is a messed up MPM. Feel free to ignore it if it doesn't
> make sense immediately.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Thursday 09 August 2001 16:32, Cody Sherr wrote:
> > This mpm is missing these configuration directives:
> >
> > ScoreBoardFile
> > LockFile
> > AcceptMutex
> >
> > though it uses related variables Is there a reason for this?
> >
> > Thanks,
--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: configuration directives for spmt_os2
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
No idea. That is a messed up MPM. Feel free to ignore it if it doesn't make sense
immediately.
Ryan
On Thursday 09 August 2001 16:32, Cody Sherr wrote:
> This mpm is missing these configuration directives:
>
> ScoreBoardFile
> LockFile
> AcceptMutex
>
> though it uses related variables Is there a reason for this?
>
> Thanks,
--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: configuration directives for spmt_os2
Posted by Brian Havard <br...@kheldar.apana.org.au>.
On Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:32:06 -0700 (PDT), Cody Sherr wrote:
>
>This mpm is missing these configuration directives:
>
>ScoreBoardFile
It never uses a file for the scoreboard. As a single process MPM, it
doesn't even need shared memory for it.
>LockFile
>AcceptMutex
OS/2 has native locks, no lock file or alternative mutex types are needed.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| Brian Havard | "He is not the messiah! |
| brianh@kheldar.apana.org.au | He's a very naughty boy!" - Life of Brian |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------